RED and Web Video

[I Bloom]

Like most DP's my eyes used to glaze over when I heard the words webisode, because this means to me, low production value, non-SAG, kind of like a sitcom but shot in someones appartment. Then recently I started taking it more seriously because real producers with real budgets started talking to me about shooting things solely for web distro. Then finally for August I decided to sign a contract to shoot a web series for good money that is going to fly me to among other places Iceland for a week to shoot on location they are distributing entirely on the web for advertising revenue. I'm stoked, its a cool project and its a "webisode" series.

But in the back of my mind I'm thinking, I need to hold onto my regular HD gear because RED is too much for this stuff.

Then I checked out the video that is linked off Mikes site HDforIndies.com and I'm thinking (and granted this is SI-2K) but RED is going to be perfect for this stuff, because low noise and shallow depth of field COMPRESS BETTER.

So here is my prediction: Sure RED is going to change the theatrical projection market we know that!! But maybe moreso than that it's going to infiltrate the web distro market, simply because with such low noise and oversampling its going to compress better than anything else out there.

That's my prediction.

IBloom

[Eugene]

That is what I am thinking, except that the pocket camera will be good enough for me. Footage good enough for a theater or for the web.

[I Bloom]

Thats true. When the pocket camera comes out I'm hoping its an awesome run and gun rig. Then I can go 100% RED.

[Joel Kaye]

But maybe moreso than that it's going to infiltrate the web distro market, simply because with such low noise and oversampling its going to compress better than anything else out there.


Beautiful looks beautiful at a lot of sizes. I've been thinking for quite a while that giving free access to small but good quality content and selling the same content in HD might be the way a lot of content creators go in the future.

RED is going to be perfect for everything from theatrical to the Net. EVERYBODY (Microsoft, Apple, Google, the networks, the stufios) is betting HUGE dollars on Internet video. Expect 1080P HD to be delivered via the Internet (PCTV, Apple TV or other consumer boxes). It'll be better than cable because the compression will be better. The big problem right now is bandwidth costs are very high unless bitorrent is used.

[Gavin Greenwalt]

Quite the opposite. Beautiful is often even better smaller.

Hides all the mistakes.

[dalen johnson]

I remember when...
O.k., so about 7 years ago I saw as an art-director/producer at both WebMD and In Touch Ministries the misconception that if its for web you dont need high quality source material.

I think we are safely past those days/times where people would stare at you when saying that you need their digi-beta to make a web compression and not a VHS. (even more so, apple, years back, was known to take their source straight from film...what do I know about their process, nothing really - but the stunning quality they have isnt soley base on compression settings...they have some nice footage to work with to begin with.)

So if I were putting up anything on web...I would think red would be great.
Now can you justify cost soley on web distribution - some can, others cant, but dont need to as they are having the funds for the red from various projects and the web is seconday...

Point is simple - can the red be to much is what I seemed to have read in your post - of course it cant. Give us 8k, 16k, the bigger the better and we will compress it better. Garbage in garbage out. ;)

Of course with broadband technology escalating the way it is, this also influences the quality of video you are able to put up.

It was kind of hard for me, with a print background, doing anything with web intially due to loss of fidelity in resolution, colors etc. (Im talking about normal images you have to compress...compression would be a sin in 'print' terms.) So coming from that background, I like to know that with the likes of video, you can obtain higher levels of quality for on-line viewing and not necessarily settle for the basic 'youtube' look.

- oh, a note to all you guys who make movies...can I suggest that the volume of the voices be boosted up and the sound score lowered?
One thing I despise about movies is that the environmental sounds - attacks, grunts, running through leaves, music, etc. are all nice crisp and loud...but when you hear the voices its like 'mumble mumble' - up goes the the volume to hear, and then whoosh, a blasted ear drum from some stupid sound effect.

O.k. wrong place to post - you guys shoot the video, not mix the sound... ;)
thought I would get that off my chest after last nights harry potter viewing.
(Oh, and dvds, what gives...my t.v. I have to turn up the volume all the way, but a t.v. channel will blast through nicely with their sound at a much lower level. - k...enough, I should go find the sound forum guild and rant their. lol

Peace

Dalen

[dalen johnson]

RED is going to be perfect for everything from theatrical to the Net. EVERYBODY (Microsoft, Apple, Google, the networks, the stufios) is betting HUGE dollars on Internet video. Expect 1080P HD to be delivered via the Internet (PCTV, Apple TV or other consumer boxes). It'll be better than cable because the compression will be better. The big problem right now is bandwidth costs are very high unless bitorrent is used.

Yep, and the BBC, E.U. (some E.U. commissioner lady here just told europe the video standard europe has to use for the internet as she wants to ensure that Europe leads the way...something along those lines. - news on the bbc, or was, for those who care. Of course some companies dont like being told what the standard is. ;)

but yes, we have come a long way in the past 7 years or so with the net.

Peace

Dalen